China threatens to sanction US over arms sales to Taiwan
David E. Powell
<http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60T07W20100130>
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.eba0f1f44dc56eaae2cdf53db03b2f4e.661&show_article=1
<http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?
id=CNG.eba0f1f44dc56eaae2cdf53db03b2f4e.661&show_article=1>
This is a big move, especially as I haven't heard of anything uber
being sold to Taiwan. If it were Arleigh Burkes, F-22s, or High-End
AIP Submarines, maybe, but this is China pushing hard on, well, not
much.
If China is looking to scramble the US economy this could be part of
the reason. Though a war of sanctions would probably hurt China worse
than the US. Google seems ready to pull out of China over Chinese
gov't interference already and not be the worse for wear over it.
David E. Powell
lil abner
Taiwan 100 billion, in arms gratis.
The Global Merchants and Bankers are calling the shots though.
dott.Piergiorgio
> This is a big move, especially as I haven't heard of anything uber
> being sold to Taiwan. If it were Arleigh Burkes, F-22s, or High-End
> AIP Submarines, maybe, but this is China pushing hard on, well, not
> much.
>
> If China is looking to scramble the US economy this could be part of
> the reason. Though a war of sanctions would probably hurt China worse
> than the US. Google seems ready to pull out of China over Chinese
> gov't interference already and not be the worse for wear over it.
Hmmm... there's a cunning in the mandarin diplomacy: seems to me that
the timing is well conceived, between the end of the private (in the
jurisprudential sense) deal and the (public) authorization to actually
deliver from US Congress and gov't, giving a "plausible denial" in a
silver plate so I suspect that in the end congress and/or administration
forbid the export, and the issue ends in the customary exchange of
apologies & diplomatic official version of the facts.....
Aside if China actually declare an embargo... well, I really like the
idea of the ol' Fidel passing away with a smile on his lips.....
Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio.
dott.Piergiorgio
OK. you have asked, you will deserve.
(taking the keys of my "classified desk")
David E. Powell
> "dott.Piergiorgio" <dott.PiergiorgioNI...@KAIGUN.fastwebnet.it> wrote:
>
> :David E. Powell ha scritto:
> :
> :> This is a big move, especially as I haven't heard of anything uber
> :> being sold to Taiwan. If it were Arleigh Burkes, F-22s, or High-End
> :> AIP Submarines, maybe, but this is China pushing hard on, well, not
> :> much.
> :>
> :> If China is looking to scramble the US economy this could be part of
> :> the reason. Though a war of sanctions would probably hurt China worse
> :> than the US. Google seems ready to pull out of China over Chinese
> :> gov't interference already and not be the worse for wear over it.
> :
> :Hmmm... there's a cunning in the mandarin diplomacy: seems to me that
> :the timing is well conceived, between the end of the private (in the
> :jurisprudential sense) deal and the (public) authorization to actually
> :deliver from US Congress and gov't, giving a "plausible denial" in a
> :silver plate so I suspect that in the end congress and/or administration
> :forbid the export, and the issue ends in the customary exchange of
> :apologies & diplomatic official version of the facts.....
>
> If it's gotten this far, it is really REALLY unlikely that Congress
> will stop it (although they can).
>
> I'd bet on it going through (and I only bet on sure things).
A side fact is that Nancy Pelosi is really not a big fan of the
Chinese treatment of Tibet. Not to mention that with Congress
unpopular as is the urge to not show they are being pressured if China
makes it overt will be strong with a lot of "Blue Dogs" and many
others going into the Midterm elections. It would also give them an
opportunity to seize hawkish ground.
> :Aside if China actually declare an embargo... well, I really like the
> :idea of the ol' Fidel passing away with a smile on his lips.....
> :
>
> You think a Chinese embargo would hurt US? It would crater their
> economy.
I'm not Obama, but if they did I might take the opportunity to say
"Very well, we'll embargo them back on trade then and have more Jobs
in America." Might or might not work to do that but it would sure bump
him up with the Unions and the blue collar folks.
Sounds disturbingly similar to the opening stanzas of Tom Clancy's
_Debt of Honor_ but....
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
jkochko68
> David E. Powell wrote:
> >http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60T07W20100130
>
> > <http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60T07W20100130>
>
>
> > <http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?
> > id=CNG.eba0f1f44dc56eaae2cdf53db03b2f4e.661&show_article=1>
>
> > This is a big move, especially as I haven't heard of anything uber
> > being sold to Taiwan. If it were Arleigh Burkes, F-22s, or High-End
> > AIP Submarines, maybe, but this is China pushing hard on, well, not
> > much.
would be far
better for the war to happen sooner rather than latter when China will
be even more
powerful and the U.S. may be less likely to intervene. Allowing
communists to subjugate
a thriving democracy would be a massive setback for the West and
embolden China to make
its next move in dominating the Far East.
>
> > If China is looking to scramble the US economy this could be part of
> > the reason. Though a war of sanctions would probably hurt China worse
> > than the US. Google seems ready to pull out of China over Chinese
> > gov't interference already and not be the worse for wear over it.
We should not be trading with China to the extent we are when our
southern neighbors are
far closer to us and poor. Lets build up the economy of Mexico through
trade and then we will
help accomplish several goals. Securing our southern border by way of
economic prosperity is just
one.
Andrew Swallow
{snip}
> We should not be trading with China to the extent we are when our
> southern neighbors are
> far closer to us and poor. Lets build up the economy of Mexico through
> trade and then we will
> help accomplish several goals. Securing our southern border by way of
> economic prosperity is just
> one.
That is NAFTA and the economic zones near the US-Mexican border.
Andrew Swallow
Andrew Swallow
{snip}
>
> You think a Chinese embargo would hurt US? It would crater their
> economy.
>
>
They way go for the USA's weak point - Government Bonds.
Andrew Swallow
Jim Wilkins
Andrew Swallow
The Chinese have quality control problems as well. The Western
distribution firms had to set up quality systems, frequently using
Japanese methods.
Andrew Swallow
Andrew Swallow
> Andrew Swallow <am.sw...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
> :>
> :> You think a Chinese embargo would hurt US? It would crater their
> :> economy.
> :>
> :
> :They way go for the USA's weak point - Government Bonds.
>
> And just how do you think that would work?
>
>
First. Stop buying US Government Bonds. This makes it hard for
Washington DC to borrow.
Second. Sell at the most inconvenient time. This makes the dollar
go down. So other foreigners will not lend or only at high interest
rates.
The high interest rates mean that companies have high costs so they
have to sell at high prices.
Since it can not borrow the government has to increase taxes, that
puts up the costs of both people and companies.
Next the government prints money, this produces inflation.
The unions react to inflation by going on strike.
Andrew Swallow
David E. Powell
> On Jan 30, 4:59 pm, lil abner <@daisey.mae> wrote:> David E. Powell wrote:
> > >http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60T07W20100130
>
> > > <http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60T07W20100130>
>
> > >http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.eba0f1f44dc56eaae2cdf53db...
>
> > > <http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?
> > > id=CNG.eba0f1f44dc56eaae2cdf53db03b2f4e.661&show_article=1>
>
> > > This is a big move, especially as I haven't heard of anything uber
> > > being sold to Taiwan. If it were Arleigh Burkes, F-22s, or High-End
> > > AIP Submarines, maybe, but this is China pushing hard on, well, not
> > > much.
>
> Which we should sell Taiwan as it is an independent country and it
> would be far
> better for the war to happen sooner rather than latter when China will
> be even more
> powerful and the U.S. may be less likely to intervene. Allowing
> communists to subjugate
> a thriving democracy would be a massive setback for the West and
> embolden China to make
> its next move in dominating the Far East
Agreed. We hav neglected them over the past two decades as China has
modernized. At one time they had a very modern force in comparison,
very specialized, with well trained pilots, sailors and soldiers. I do
not know of the training but their quality and modernity has been
allowed to slip and that is a huge mistake. If DC really wants to
avoid problems in that part of the world it is better to allow sale of
gear that will help stand off a problem from happening, it is a small
investment.
Especially as the tech economy that the US is so dependent on is
anchored firmly in Taiwan, where a HUGE percentage of the world's
electronic components are made.
> > > If China is looking to scramble the US economy this could be part of
> > > the reason. Though a war of sanctions would probably hurt China worse
> > > than the US. Google seems ready to pull out of China over Chinese
> > > gov't interference already and not be the worse for wear over it.
>
> We should not be trading with China to the extent we are when our
> southern neighbors are
> far closer to us and poor. Lets build up the economy of Mexico through
> trade and then we will
> help accomplish several goals. Securing our southern border by way of
> economic prosperity is just
> one.
We are sort of doing that now, our people importing stuff from there,
but not the stuff we want and not funding the people there we would
want to fund.
There's more than one place to buy imports from, yeah. How about some
kind of trade plan involving Haiti and getting industry set up there
and in the Dominican Republic? Honduras and Colombia too.
> > Americans don't give a rat's hairy posterior what China does. Send
> > Taiwan 100 billion, in arms gratis.
> > The Global Merchants and Bankers are calling the shots though
Many of whom are western? Plus the tech industry is a huge component
of the world economy, only an insane person would want to throw that
off kilter.
David E. Powell
To sell low they need a buyer, and they are risking losing large
amounts of cash doing that on bonds that could come back up after
someone else bought low.
I agree the deficit has us in a pickle. Unlike the Cold War with
Russia, where the USSR's economy was in far worse shape than the US
economy.
tankfixer
fjmc...@gmail.com says...
> :>
> :> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
> :> :>
> :> :> You think a Chinese embargo would hurt US? It would crater their
> :> :> economy.
> :> :>
> :> :
> :> :They way go for the USA's weak point - Government Bonds.
> :> :
> :>
> :> And just how do you think that would work?
> :>
> :
> :First. Stop buying US Government Bonds. This makes it hard for
> :Washington DC to borrow.
>
> Only if nobody else wants them. Even then, that just pushes up the
> interest rate FOR THAT ISSUE OF BONDS.
>
> :
> :Second. Sell at the most inconvenient time. This makes the dollar
> :go down.
> :
>
> Well, no, it doesn't. It does nothing at all, in fact. If they
> discount them, it costs THEM a bunch of money. If they don't, it
> makes no different who owns them.
>
> :
> :The high interest rates mean that companies have high costs so they
> :have to sell at high prices.
>
> Nope. Interest on government bonds is totally different from what
> companies pay. There is no real evidence for 'crowding out' unless
> the economy is running at a high pitch.
>
> :
> :Since it can not borrow the government has to increase taxes, that
> :puts up the costs of both people and companies.
> :Next the government prints money, this produces inflation.
> :The unions react to inflation by going on strike.
>
> Except your assumptions don't cause any of the causes for your claimed
> results.
He left out the reaction from the US to China attempting to dump bonds,
an embargo on goods from China..
The US can do without the cheap trinkets that China makes and there are
dozens of countries willing to take the business.
But China can't afford to have millions idled when the factories close.
lil abner
They can/will be able to do as they well please.
It might be vital to you or us but not to Chinese Marxists. They can
stop the show or set the pace at any time they see fit. Mao is a prime
example.
If you think they cant' or won't you are foolish. The Chinese aren't
playing the game of global trade through global peace.
They intend to take Taiwan and would like nothing better than the US to
send a few war ships. Their current technology can reportedly take out
the fleets with marginal losses themselves. The Global Merchants are
playing their game. They don';t give a rat's hairy posterior about any
nation's sovereignty or security or the freedom of the people.
I suggest you get your nose out of the evening business report and smell
the brimstone.
PaPa Peng
I agree with your overall take that nothing much will happen. The US
may approve the sale of arms to Taiwan ($6.4 billion (£4 billion)
package). But there is nothing to say that Taiwan must buy. In the
current global recession in which Taiwan's economy is declining and
much of her trade is closely linked to China's its unlikely that
Taiwan will provoke China unnecessarily and spend megabucks on arms
that will never be used or is good only for the first 24 hours. If
there is any retaliation from China over the arms sale it is highly
unlikely China will link that action directly to the sale. The US
cannot yield to a direct Chinese threat. If China cannot deliver on
her threat it is a diplomatic loss. China will instead squeeze the US
somewhere else and Obama will have to yield without losing face.
One factor never mentioned in the arms sale is that Taiwan may reunite
with China within the decade. In that case all her (US supplied)
military equipment will fall into China's hands. On this possibility
it is doubtful that the arms to be sold to Taiwan will contain the
latest or the most capable systems. I doubt the Taiwan military is
into buying less than the best stuff. What I'd like to see is China's
weapons experts providing their Taiwan counterparts with a shopping
list of the best and latest features for US arms. That will really
stop this arms sales dong and pony show.
Jack Linthicum
A lesson for China, money won't buy obedience, especially from Number
One. The same story retold, if you want to be a part of this era,
partake, don't just say "no". Iran.
But this story ends up where nearly every story ends up, nowadays,
money.
February 1, 2010
News Analysis
U.S. Arms for Taiwan Send Beijing a Message
By HELENE COOPER
WASHINGTON — For the past year, China has adopted an increasingly
muscular position toward the United States, berating American
officials for the global economic crisis, stage-managing President
Obama’s visit to China in November, refusing to back a tougher climate
change agreement in Copenhagen and standing fast against American
demands for tough new Security Council sanctions against Iran.
Now, the Obama administration has started to push back. In announcing
an arms sales package to Taiwan worth $6 billion on Friday, the United
States leveled a direct strike at the heart of the most sensitive
diplomatic issue between the two countries since America affirmed the
“one China” policy in 1972.
The arms package was doubly infuriating to Beijing coming so soon
after the Bush administration announced a similar arms package for
Taiwan in 2008, and right as tensions were easing somewhat in Beijing
and Taipei’s own relations. China’s immediate, and outraged, reaction
— cancellation of some military exchanges and announcement of punitive
sanctions against American companies — demonstrates, China experts
said, that Beijing is feeling a little burned, particularly because
the Taiwan arms announcement came on the same day that Secretary of
State Hillary Rodham Clinton publicly berated China for not taking a
stronger position on holding Iran accountable for its nuclear program.
While administration officials sounded a uniform public note,
cautioning Beijing not to allow this latest tiff to damage overall
relations, some administration officials suggested privately that the
timing of the arms sales and the tougher language on Iran was
calculated to send a message to Beijing to avoid assumptions that
President Obama would be deferential to China over American security
concerns and existing agreements.
“This was a case of making sure that there was no misunderstanding
that we will act in our own national security interests,” one senior
administration official said. A second Obama administration official,
also speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity
of the issue, said pointedly: “Unlike the previous administration, we
did not wait until the end of our administration to go ahead with the
arms sales to Taiwan. We did it early.”
But larger questions remain about where the Obama administration is
heading on China policy, and whether the new toughness signals a
fundamentally new direction and will yield results that last year’s
softer approach did not.
Beyond the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, management of the American
relationship with China is one of Mr. Obama’s biggest foreign policy
challenges. Flush with cash, China’s economy is growing mightily, and
China has become one of the biggest foreign lenders to the United
States. China also is an increasingly critical American trading
partner and a global rival in influence and economic power.
“The president’s view is that obviously we have to have a mature
enough relationship with China that we can be candid and firm where we
disagree and cooperate forcefully when we agree,” a senior
administration official said. He insisted that the timing of the arms
package and Mrs. Clinton’s tough words were “not designed to send a
gratuitous message to China, but to demonstrate the firmness of our
position.”
China has a history of getting off to a tough start with American
administrations. President Bill Clinton alienated Beijing with tough
talk on human rights, even signing an executive order that made
renewal of trade privileges for China dependent on progress on human
rights. But Mr. Clinton reversed himself in 1994, saying that the
United States and China would move forward faster on issues of mutual
concern if Beijing was not isolated.
Similarly, President George W. Bush’s first dealings with the Chinese
were also fractious, including an effort to recover American airmen
whose spy plane was forced down off the Chinese coast.
“The Obama administration came in exactly the opposite,” said Steven
Clemons, director of foreign policy programs at the New America
Foundation. “They needed China on economic issues, climate change,
Iran, North Korea. So they came in wanting to do this lovely dance
with China, but that didn’t work.”
Instead, China pushed back hard, including at the Copenhagen climate
change summit meeting in December, when Beijing balked at American and
European demands that China agree to an international monitoring
system for emissions targets. Twice, the Chinese prime minister, Wen
Jiabao, sent an underling to represent him at meetings with Mr. Obama,
in what diplomats said was an intentional snub. Mr. Obama later had to
track down Mr. Wen, surprising him and appearing at the doorway of a
conference room where Mr. Wen was meeting with the leaders of South
Africa, Brazil and India.
The United States and China eventually reached a compromise on the
monitoring agreement, but the whole incident left a bad taste in the
mouths of many Obama administration officials, who believed China had
deliberately set out to belittle Mr. Obama, and who were determined to
push back and reassert American authority.
“The Chinese,” said James J. Shinn, who was assistant secretary of
defense for Asia during the Bush administration, “now seem to have a
palpable sense of confidence that they’re more in the driver’s seat
than two years ago, across a whole range of issues.”
For Mr. Obama, the arms sale to Taiwan, which China considers a
breakaway province, may be only the first of many instances this year
in which he will run afoul of Beijing.
Some foreign policy experts said that the administration now seemed
intent on poking at the sovereignty issues that have long been China’s
Achilles’ heel. Mrs. Clinton noted on Friday that Mr. Obama would soon
be meeting with the Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama — a
meeting that White House officials put off last summer to avoid
alienating Beijing in advance of Mr. Obama’s China trip. China regards
the Dalai Lama as an advocate of Tibetan independence.
“China is feeling very confident these days, but the one thing that
the Chinese freak out about consistently are sovereignty issues,” said
Mr. Clemons of the New America Foundation. “So anything related to
Taiwan or Tibet will get them going.”
Added to that, the administration has been championing Internet
freedom recently, another source of public tension with Beijing.
China’s government is embroiled in a fight with Google over that
company’s complaints about Internet censorship and hacking attacks it
says originated in China.
But the tougher American positions do not change the fact that Mr.
Obama needs Chinese cooperation on a host of issues. Beyond his
efforts to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the president is also
working with Beijing on similar ambitions in North Korea.
And Mr. Obama announced in his State of the Union address last week
that he planned to double American exports in the next five years, an
ambitious goal that cannot be met unless he somehow persuades China to
let its currency appreciate, making Chinese products more expensive in
the United States and American products more affordable in China.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/world/asia/01china.html?hp=&pagewanted=print
Ray O'Hara
"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:DYydnV-vuY66RfjW...@bt.com...
> First. Stop buying US Government Bonds. This makes it hard for Washington
> DC to borrow.
> Second. Sell at the most inconvenient time. This makes the dollar
> go down. So other foreigners will not lend or only at high interest
> rates.
> The high interest rates mean that companies have high costs so they
> have to sell at high prices.
> Since it can not borrow the government has to increase taxes, that
> puts up the costs of both people and companies.
> Next the government prints money, this produces inflation.
> The unions react to inflation by going on strike.
>
> Andrew Swallow
why would people buy bonds they didn't buy the first time around when those
bonds are being dumped to lessen their value.
we have China by their bank account. they have to factor in what doing
something like that would do to them.
after all it's their money.
Kerryn Offord
People will buy the bonds if the yields are high enough.
That's why, IF China was to sell at less than face value, people would
buy the bonds.. (because the "coupon rate" stays the same -- Interest US
is paying on the bonds), increasing the yield
The problem for the US would then be..IN order to sell new bonds, they
have to increase the coupon rate (Might not be the right term.. but the
interest rate fixed for those bonds)..
And well.. If China isn't buying then basically the market might be
overflowing with US dollar bonds... without many buyers.. further
driving up the coupon rate (And the cost of borrowing)
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Jeff Dougherty
> PaPa Peng <papape...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> :
> :I agree with your overall take that nothing much will happen. The US
> :may approve the sale of arms to Taiwan ($6.4 billion (£4 billion)
> :package). But there is nothing to say that Taiwan must buy.
>
> You really are an idiot, PingPowPoo. If Taiwan hadn't already ASKED
> for this stuff, we wouldn't be talking about authorizing the sale.
I agree with the substance here, at least. The FMS purchaser comes to
the U.S. Government with a wish list, and after a lot of back and
forth talk and general horse trading the final list is presented to
Congress for approval. By the time Congress votes on it, it's pretty
much a done deal- AFAIK the Congressional resolution authorizes the
U.S. military to procure the items requested on behalf of the foreign
government. For what happens if there's a SNAFU after that step, see
the Kidd class destroyers- ironically now in Taiwanese hands as well.
-JTD